CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Sunil Dutt Sharma vs State Of H.P. And Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 4 February 2026 · Citation: (2026) 02 SHI CK 1643

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1613 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 339 words

Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J

1.

Notice Mr. Sidharth Jalta, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and accepts service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3.

2.

Keeping in view, the order which is proposed to be passed in the present petition, neither notice is required to be issued to respondent No.4, nor reply is to be called for from the respondents.

3.

The precise grievance of the petitioner is that he has again been transferred to hard area, whereas he had already served in hard area for almost four years. The petitioner has made a representation after joining at the transferred place, which is again a hard area i.e. Government Middle School Naichana u/c GSSS Bogdhar (Sirmour).

4.

Respondent No.4 had earlier filed the writ petition before this Hon’ble Court which was registered as CWP No.18815 of 2025, titled, Amit Kumar Shastri Vs. State of H.P.. The writ petition was disposed of on 28.11.2025 with a direction to the respondents-State to consider and decide his pending representation as averred in the present petition.

5.

The petitioner after joining at the transferred place has made a representation vide Annexure P-3 dated 12.01.2026 mentioning the stations. In the representation, the petitioner has also submitted that he has ailing mother, who is a heart patient and at present under treatment from PGI, Chandigarh. It has further been stated that she was operated upon in the year 2018 and requires routine follow-up.

6.

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner had already served in hard area, the petitioner is directed to approach the Competent Authority by filing a fresh representation in terms of the transfer policy highlighting his grievances.

7.

In case the petitioner makes a fresh representation within one week in terms of the transfer policy, the respondents-State/Competent Authority shall consider and decide the same sympathetically within two weeks. While deciding the representation, the adverse family circumstances of the petitioner shall also be considered.

8.

The petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications if any shall also stand disposed of.